If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

In the latest gambit out of Washington's head-spinning budget debate, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced Wednesday that if the Senate fails to act by next week, Republicans will proffer a bill forcing an earlier House GOP plan that did not pass Congress to become the "law of the land."
The proposal outlined Wednesday would be an unusual and likely unconstitutional move. Under the bill, the $61 billion budget that passed the House last month and subsequently went nowhere would go into effect if the Senate does not approve a budget by April 6. Plus, it would provide that in the event of a shutdown lasting more than 24 hours, members of Congress and President Obama wouldn't get paid retroactively for the days the government was shuttered.
The proposal is meant to put pressure on the Senate to give Congress some kind of spending plan to work with so that the government does not arrive empty-handed on its April 8 deadline without a budget, forcing lights out.
But the proposal raises all manner of constitutional and practical questions.
First, it would effectively deem a prior bill passed, even though it did not clear the Senate or win the president's signature. Second, it's unclear why or whether Republicans think the Senate and president would accept the so-called "Government Shutdown Prevention Act" when they didn't approve the initial House plan.

I kinda understand what they are trying to do, but this move is just plain idiotic, why even purpose a move that has "Unconstitutional" written all over it after the last year of calling Obamacare unconstitutional

This just makes Repubs look weak. He is getting too cozy with the President who would not give him the time of day before the last election. Add Dirty Harry and Pisslosi to that mix and it's doubtful if Bonehead will survive as majority speaker the next time around.

So they pass a bill and then pass another bill that says if the last bill doesn't get signed into law, it becomes law.

That makes sense.

no, they would just make the original Bill the that was past would become law. This is the dumbest move that the GOP could make, people already blame Dems for any potental shut down, why pull victory from the jaws of defeat? oh wait...that's their fucking dumbasses MO

I kinda understand what they are trying to do, but this move is just plain idiotic, why even purpose a move that has "Unconstitutional" written all over it after the last year of calling Obamacare unconstitutional

It sounds stupid from a PR perspective but the propaganda machine is designed to deal with inconsistencies all the time.

Combine the corporate media blitz with the Average American's goldfish attention span and you can bet that this criticism you are describing here will be simply brushed aside as "liebral talking points".

Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations

It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.

no, they would just make the original Bill the that was past would become law. This is the dumbest move that the GOP could make, people already blame Dems for any potental shut down, why pull victory from the jaws of defeat? oh wait...that's their fucking dumbasses MO

Dems will just say it's the GOP and the GOP will just blame Dems and after a few thousand emails have circulated and Kelly's Court has decided popular opinion on the morning "news cycle", then both sides will simply blame each other and be convinced they are right. Facts be damned, buzzwords and flashy images are all that count.

Market research, focus groups, think tanks, and other propaganda methodology is the only field that really uses psychoanalytic concepts effectively - and I mean very effectively.

Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations

It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.

Dems will just say it's the GOP and the GOP will just blame Dems and after a few thousand emails have circulated and Kelly's Court has decided popular opinion on the morning "news cycle", then both sides will simply blame each other and be convinced they are right. Facts be damned, buzzwords and flashy images are all that count.

Market research, focus groups, think tanks, and other propaganda methodology is the only field that really uses psychoanalytic concepts effectively - and I mean very effectively.

do you even have anything worth saying? it's been nothing but incoherent drivel since you got back, at lest before you would say something worth arguing a point with...

I kinda understand what they are trying to do, but this move is just plain idiotic, why even purpose a move that has "Unconstitutional" written all over it after the last year of calling Obamacare unconstitutional

Don't feed the trolls!

The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.